Difficulty in getting change in our country is an ongoing source of frustration.
Particularly when we have huge problems facing us as we do today.
But the founders knew what they were doing setting up the checks and balances of
our constitutional republic. The delicate arrangement we call freedom should
never submit with ease to a charismatic demagogue or to an emotion filled
The current push for gun control is case and point. It is at a time like this
that we should be grateful that changing our laws is hard to do.
Every normal and decent American wants to live in a country where we will never
again see life lost as result of a weapon held and fired by some deranged
If we knew how to prevent it from ever happening again, we all would sign off in
But we don’t know. And that is the point.
Ironically, President Obama acknowledges that we don’t know what causes the
irrational violent incidents we have witnessed. It is the reason one part of the
proposal he has put forth is to provide funding to the Centers for Disease
Control to study the problem.
Yet, despite acknowledging lack of understanding about what drives gun violence,
the president and Senator Dianne Feinstein do not hesitate to offer what they
claim is a solution. They propose further controls on gun ownership that are
deeply problematic in their intrusion on our freedoms and right to bear arms,
guaranteed under the second amendment of our constitution.
Why are the president and Senator Feinstein so ready to compromise basic
American freedoms with gun control measures, that already have a dubious record
of success, to solve a problem that President Obama acknowledges we don’t
To the president’s credit, in his remarks introducing his gun control
initiative, he acknowledges that there may be cultural reasons that contribute
to this sick, violent behavior.
But he defines the cultural parameters of what he chooses to look at in such
narrow terms that you have to question his seriousness or sincerity.
The president said, “Congress should fund research into the effects that violent
video games have on young minds.”
But why limit this discussion to video games?
Has the president walked by a local movie theater complex recently to see what
is playing? How about the local fare on television? Or what about the content of
Can it possibly be that the disproportionate support that the Democratic Party
gets from the entertainment industry - major sources of gratuitous violent media
– gets them a pass from today’s discussion?
President Obama outraised Mitt Romney five to one from the movie/TV/music
This business was in the top ten sources of business funding for Senator
Feinstein’s re-election in 2012, with election funding sources showing these
entertainment businesses didn’t provide a dime to her Republican opponent.
What about other major themes in American culture today that contribute to a
sense of meaningless and lack of respect for the sacredness of life?
Of course, I am talking about our indifference to the lives of unborn children,
who are murdered in our country with impunity. Somehow those who want to intrude
on gun ownership can live with the violence perpetrated on the unborn and have
little interest in seeing its implications on violence in other areas of our
Another part of this discussion is about the mentally ill. Can President Obama
or Senator Feinstein give us a good definition of mental illness and seriously
tell us how this can be used to control gun ownership?
We have a serious problem on our hands, which demands serious discussion.
This discussion is not taking place and the gun control initiatives that have
been put forward do not begin to justify the compromise of our basic freedoms,
which they would require.
Star Parker is founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal
and Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based
public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of the newly revised Uncle
Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can do